Re: [PATCH 1/2] fscrypt: new helper function - fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open()

[Luís Henriques]

Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 11:08:23AM +0000, Luís Henriques wrote:
>> > So, actually I think this patch doesn't make sense.  If ceph is doing the above
>> > in its ->lookup() anyway, then it just should do the exact same thing in its
>> > ->atomic_open() too.
>> 
>> In fact, my initial fix for the cephfs bug was doing just that.  It was a
>> single patch to ceph_atomic_open() that would simply do:
>> 
>> 	if (IS_ENCRYPTED(dir)) {
>> 		set_bit(CEPH_MDS_R_FSCRYPT_FILE, &req->r_req_flags);
>> 		err = __fscrypt_prepare_readdir(dir);
>> 		if (!err && !fscrypt_has_encryption_key(dir)) {
>> 			spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock);
>> 			dentry->d_flags |= DCACHE_NOKEY_NAME;
>> 			spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
>> 		}
>> 	}
>> 
>> What made me want to create a new helper was that I simply needed to call
>> fscrypt_get_encryption_info() to force the encryption info to be set in
>> the parent directory.  But this function was only accessible through
>> __fscrypt_prepare_readdir(), which isn't really a great function name for
>> what I need here.
>> 
>> Since __fscrypt_prepare_readdir() doesn't seem to be used anywhere else,
>> maybe it could be removed and fscrypt_get_encryption_info() be exported
>> instead?
>
> Well, fscrypt_get_encryption_info() *used* to be exported, but it was hard to
> keep track of its use cases (some of which were not actually necessary), which
> is why it eventually got replaced with use-case oriented helper functions.
>
> Maybe just use fscrypt_prepare_lookup_partial() for the name of your new helper
> function (instead of fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open())?

OK, thanks for the name suggestion (naming is *indeed* hard).  I'll go try
to get a new helper that can be used in both open_atomic and lookup.
That'll require a bit more of testing so that I don't end up breaking
something else.

Cheers,
-- 
Luís